Snopes often does not show all angles to a story.
I can't get the Heritage link to open, but isn't it true that Presidents often cite other EO's in some of the "new" ones they issue where they state continued understanding with previous EOs without the need to issue a duplicate opinion, and in so doing that is upping the count? If so is not support for previous EOs by the current POTUS not applicable to be dosclosed as demonstrating the position of that POTUS?
Link works for me..
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2001/02/the-use-and-abuse-of-executive-orders-and-other-presidential-directivesbut yeah, that link discusses pretty much everything you would ever want to know about EOs- different types, how the classifications have been changed over the years (which really means you can't compare them directly) and a bunch of other issues...
But as the next section shows, the overwhelming majority of directives, including executive orders, are routine and few have significant policy implications beyond the executive branch. Thus, it would be a mistake to conclude that the number of executive orders or proclamations is a reliable indicator of whether a particular President has abused his executive order authority. In fact, a more careful review of executive orders suggests no correlation between the overall number of executive orders issued and the legitimacy of individual orders. The true measure of abuse of authority is not the overall number of directives, but whether any orders were illegal or abusive, and if so, how many and of what significance.
There are legitimate orders, and illegitimate ones. Problem is, Liberals no longer agree to follow the Constitution and its intentions as agreed, so legitimate and illegitimate have no meaning anymore. Mittens should just issue an EO declaring he will not enforce Obamacare, just as Obama refused to enforce illegal immigration legislation. HE should then activate the NDAA, arrest every liberal as a terrorist and deport them to gitmo or other regimes to be tortured to death. After all, why not? If the liberals aren't going to follow our agreement, why should we?
